Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed applications for registration under Section 12AB and Section 80G(5). The CIT(Exemption) rejected the applications for non-compliance with notices and lack of necessary information, despite the assessee filing submissions with a slight delay. The appeals were filed against these rejections.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had filed submissions though with a delay, and the e-filing window was open. Since the applications were rejected at the threshold without a decision on merits, the Tribunal set aside the orders.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection of registration applications under Sections 12AB and 80G(5) for procedural non-compliance, despite submissions being filed, is justified? Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case.
Sections Cited
12AB, 80G(5), 12A(1)(ac)(ii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH
आदेश / O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (A.M): These are two appeals filed by the assessee against the respective orders of Ld. CIT(Exemption) denying registration u/s. 12AB as well as u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.
& 1193/MUM/2025 Bombay Education Trust 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee moved an application in Form 10AB u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(ii) seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. Thereafter notice dated 8th November 2024 was issued to the assessee seeking necessary/ information documentation. In response, the assessee filed its submission on 28.11.2024. Thereafter going through the submission so filed by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) sought further information in respect of the activities being undertaken by the assessee, the expenditure being incurred, etc and notice dated 5.12.2024 was issued. However, there was no compliance on part of the assessee and thereafter, after issuing show-cause dated 19.12.2024 which was supposed to be complied by 23.12.2024, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) proceeded with the matter and in absence of necessary compliance made by the assessee, the application seeking registration u/s. 12AB was rejected.
As per the Ld. CIT(Exemption), the assessee has made no compliance to the terms of the above notices. He held that the registration under section 12AB is to be granted in terms of the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act after being satisfied about the objects of the trust or institution, the genuineness of activities, and the compliance of any other law for the time being in force as are material for the purposes of achieving its objects. In the absence of necessary compliance by the Applicant, the ld CIT(E) held that he was unable to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on these parameters. As such, in view of the statutory limitation to decide on the & 1193/MUM/2025 Bombay Education Trust application on or before 31.12.2024, the ld CIT(E) held that he was left with no other option but to reject the application seeking registration under section 12AB of the Act.
Similarly, the application seeking registration u/s. 80G(5) was rejected in view of rejection of the application u/s. 12AB of the Act.
Against these rejecting orders, the assessee is in appeal before us. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that in response to notice dated 5.12.2024, the assessee did file its submissions and a copy thereof was placed on record, however, there is admittedly a delay in filing the submissions which were filed on 25.12.2024 as against the due date of 11.12.2024. It was submitted that the window for e-filing the submissions was open and the assessee did file the necessary submissions, however, by that time, the Ld. CIT(Exemption) had already passed the order rejecting the application seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act. It was further submitted that in view of the rejection of the application u/s 12AB, the application seeking registration u/s 80G was also rejected by the Ld. CIT(Exemption). It was submitted that in the interest of the justice, the assessee be allowed one more opportunity and the matter may be set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(Exemption) to consider the submission already filed and available on record and decide the matter afresh.
& 1193/MUM/2025 Bombay Education Trust 6. The Ld. DR was heard who has submitted that the assessee has been granted sufficient opportunity as evident from the impugned order so passed by the Ld. CIT(Exemption). He accordingly relied on the findings of the Ld. CIT(Exemption).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. AR has fairly submitted that there is a slight delay in filing the necessary submission, at the same time, given that the e-filing window was open and not closed before passing of the impugned order and the fact that submissions have already been filed and uploaded on the e-filing portal of the department and same are already available on record and given the fact that the application has not been decided on merits rather for want of necessary information and has been rejected at the very threshold, we deem it appropriate that the matter be set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(Exemption) to decide the same after taking into consideration the submissions so filed and any other information/documentation so required. Consequentially, the application seeking registration u/s 80G(5) has been rejected and the same also deserve to be set- aside to the file of the ld CIT(Exemption).
Both these matters are accordingly set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(Exemption) to decide the same afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
Order pronounced in open court on 04.04.2025.